Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kab1one
The other dirty little secret is the diversion doesn't remove you from flood insurance requirements. If your lot is to low, you need flood insurance with or without the diversion.
I am no expert, but I think you are wrong.
I live next to the Red River at one of the lowest elevations in Fargo. We are protected by a flood wall and dikes. Flood insurance is not required.
Once FEMA certifies an area is out of the 100 year flood plain because of protective measures taken, the property is no longer in the flood zone when the FEMA maps are re-drawn.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
roadwarrior
I am no expert, but I think you are wrong.
I live next to the Red River at one of the lowest elevations in Fargo. We are protected by a flood wall and dikes. Flood insurance is not required.
Once FEMA certifies an area is out of the 100 year flood plain because of protective measures taken, the property is no longer in the flood zone when the FEMA maps are re-drawn.
He is wrong. The Diversion will remove over 10,000 EXISTING structures from FEMA's next revision of the 100-year floodplain. Opponents love to talk about how the project only benefits developers, but the truth is that new developments are all elevated and protected from flooding. It is the existing portions of Fargo and West Fargo, and Harwood that will see tremendous benefits.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Civil06
He is wrong. The Diversion will remove over 10,000 EXISTING structures from FEMA's next revision of the 100-year floodplain. Opponents love to talk about how the project only benefits developers, but the truth is that new developments are all elevated and protected from flooding. It is the existing portions of Fargo and West Fargo, and Harwood that will see tremendous benefits.
So it removes all existing structures?
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Civil06
He is wrong. The Diversion will remove over 10,000 EXISTING structures from FEMA's next revision of the 100-year floodplain. Opponents love to talk about how the project only benefits developers, but the truth is that new developments are all elevated and protected from flooding. It is the existing portions of Fargo and West Fargo, and Harwood that will see tremendous benefits.
http://fmdam.org/will-the-fargo-moor...ance-premiums/
It will be on a property by property basis. You can go through a process currently in which you can get engineer certification and be removed from a flood insurance requirement if the property is high enough. In many cases inside of the diversion, the elevation is not high enough and flood insurance will be still be required .
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1998braves64
Yes but in 20 years there could be a need for more. I think they have room for quite a few more out there. 15 years ago there was a huge lack of decent softball diamonds.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL on a bullet train from Hillsboro.
I agree in time we will definitely need them. But since this thing will cost a small fortune, they need to lay the basic infrastructure first and then do things like baseball diamonds later. It seems silly to build baseball diamonds before they complete snowmobile, skiing, camping, and hiking trails. It's kind of a double edged sword because you need things to draw people to the area, but you also have to build it first which will be the most expensive part.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
This is from a few months ago, but it looks like it will be one heck of a project. https://www.inforum.com/news/governm...Sports-Complex
I also read that the park district is going to move their offices out of the downtown train depot and into this future location. I'm glad because the old depot is one of the coolest buildings in town, and it deserves to be something cooler than the park district offices.
In other news, the Fargo Public school offices are moving to the old R.D. Offutt building (they are moving to Block 9) They will put their downtown office on 4th St available for the public to buy. It's a cool old building behind the new mercantile building that used to be the Goodyear spot. The police will be putting a substation in the mercantile building. Lots of moves, but that whole area is really coming together nicely.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Civil06
He is wrong. The Diversion will remove over 10,000 EXISTING structures from FEMA's next revision of the 100-year floodplain. Opponents love to talk about how the project only benefits developers, but the truth is that new developments are all elevated and protected from flooding. It is the existing portions of Fargo and West Fargo, and Harwood that will see tremendous benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kab1one
http://fmdam.org/will-the-fargo-moor...ance-premiums/
It will be on a property by property basis. You can go through a process currently in which you can get engineer certification and be removed from a flood insurance requirement if the property is high enough. In many cases inside of the diversion, the elevation is not high enough and flood insurance will be still be required .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kab1one
Summary of the special assessment district vote
http://fmdam.org/fargo-moorhead-floo...-be-dissolved/
The fraud of the special assessment district was the diversion authority was that the specials would not be assessed, but used to help with the bond rating. That is far from truth, as soon as sales tax did not meet revenues to meet the bond funding, the specials in fact would kick in. As such the sales tax projections counted on a 3% annual growth in sales tax forever to meet bond obligations. In none of the years since this vote has Fargo had a 3% sales tax growth. Revenues have been plat. So the specials would then be assessed to the properties. As Hammer, noted its like co-signing for a car. But any good financial advisor would tell you, NEVER CO SIGN.
The other dirty little secret is the diversion doesn't remove you from flood insurance requirements. If your lot is to low, you need flood insurance with or without the diversion.
So putting the thoughts in these three posts together...the diversion will mainly benefit existing structures in Fargo, West Fargo and Harwood (I live in Harwood) by reducing the threat of a flood, but many (the majority?) existing structures are not at a high enough elevation so they will still need flood insurance if there is a mortgage on the property as the lender will almost certainly require it.
If what is typed is true, then I tend to lean towards the diversion being not a very good use of taxpayer dollars, based on the current protections in place in Fargo, West Fargo and Harwood, combined with people/institutions getting very good at planning and implementing emergency or temporary measures. I don't know the exact numbers, but I don't remember many homes or businesses being flooded in the ugly years of 2009, 2010 and 2011. It seems like property owners will be getting unnecessarily hit in the pocket book multiple ways to protect their properties...assessments for the diversion when the sales tax falls short, the sales tax itself, and flood insurance.
Now if the diversion ultimately gets built, then might as well go all the way with the green space and parks.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
If corporations pass on higher taxes to consumers, doesn’t the same apply to property taxes and landlords? Therefore renters vote to increase their rent when they vote for tax increases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grizzled
In my opinion a vote shouldn’t be weighted so it’s decided before ballots are cast. When a vote of citizens and property owners wouldn’t pass without setting it up that way it certainly doesn’t seem right.
I have no problems with new schools. Can’t remember the last time I voted against one. Not sure what your point is as it’s a poor comparison.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hammerhead
If corporations pass on higher taxes to consumers, doesn’t the same apply to property taxes and landlords? Therefore renters vote to increase their rent when they vote for tax increases.
Sure. I’m assuming landlords made up a good chunk of the only 48% of non city, county owned property that voted in favor.
Re: Fargo in the next 10 years??
Wonderful how routine a new project this big downtown is now. Gonna be a wildly different town in a decade.
https://www.inforum.com/news/governm...adway-and-Main